Technical note: A system for continuous recording of ruminal pH in cattle1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuous recording of ruminal pH in cannulated cattle has been practiced to study rumen metabolism. However, most systems reported did not permit animal mobility during pH recording. Therefore, the objective of this study was to develop a continuous rumen pH data acquisition system that permitted animal mobility during data acquisition. A further objective was to compare the pH readings obtained using the continuous recording system to readings obtained at the same time using spot sampling. The continuous recording system was composed of a heavy-duty electrode and a data logger. The electrode was attached to a 0.5-kg weight to help maintain the electrode in the ventral sac of the rumen. The electrode was connected via a 0.5-m cable to a lightweight data logger that was mounted on the animal's back using a belt wrapped around the girth. The data logger was battery powered and could hold over 13,000 pH data values. A personal digital assistant was used to configure and download data from the data logger during the experiment. Ruminal pH was continuously recorded (every 10 s) using a dry Holstein cow fed alfalfa hay ad libitum in a 3-d experiment to compare the performance of the continuous system to spot samples taken from the ventral sac of the rumen, the same location as the continuous electrode. The spot samples were collected 3 times per d for 3 d. At every sampling time, 3 replicate samples were collected, pH was determined immediately using a handheld pH meter, and readings were averaged (n = 3) and compared with the average of the 3 pH readings recorded using the continuous system at the same time. The pH recorded by spot sampling (6.63 +/- 0.04) was greater (P = 0.009) than that of the continuous system (6.56 +/- 0.03), with a correlation of r = 0.88 (P = 0.002). The continuous recording system has the potential to facilitate measurement of ruminal pH in free-roaming cattle.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".